Hi everyone. I was wondering if anyone could perhaps give some suggestions on what size lowboy I'd need to move a Liebherr 984C excavator? In terms of weight, it's around 120,000 kg. I've never dealt with anything this big before and normally never had to use anything above 4 axles.
Personally I would be looking to, in the words of the best toy boxes, "some assembly required". Boom, stick, bucket, and counterweight would all come off (plus maybe some catwalks, exhaust stacks, etc) leaving you with just the base machine to put on a lowboy. The base machine goes around 90,000kg. Remove the track frames and the weight would come down even more but the downside you would have is that the machine would not be driveable to load and offload from the lowboy. Try here http://www.liebherr.com/ME/en-GB/products_me.wfw/id-14403-0/measure-metric/tab-1012_1517 and download the 4.3MB pdf file. The measurements of all all the component parts are shown in the last few pages. A 984's a little big for a bush-clearing project isn't it..?
Thanks for that Nige. Taking off a few parts to bring it down to circa 90,000kg's would make life a lot easier. I wouldn't fancy removing the track frames every time we moved it though. Way too big for bush clearing indeed. My old man and I came across one for sale that's appears to be in reasonable condition and is attractively priced. Theres a few big earthmoving jobs springing up next year and apart from the local phosphate mine, I don't think there are any excavators above the 50-65 ton range available. So wondering if we could capitalize on the situation.
Nige:
I'm not sure just how much weight you'd get off with just the stick and bucket removed. The Liebherr data showed it with the boom (about 15t) and counterweight (about 20t) off as well for shipping and gave a base machine weight of 89t on 24" track shoes or 90.5t on 30" track shoes. Personally I don't think the numbers add up. Take the basic machine at 90t + boom & counterweight at 35t + stick & bucket at approximately 15t the pair and if my maths is right your total machine weight is somewhere in the region of 140t rather than the 120t you mentioned in your OP. Tidy looking machine though if that's the one you're thinking about.
I'll have to do my research on the numbers. Yeah, that's the one I've seen advertised. Also seen a Hitachi EX1100 for slightly more money. The pumps have been rebuilt and it comes with a spare rebuilt engine. U/C doesn't look in as good a condition as the 984 though.
I think rodtg was talking kilograms Nige, about 100 ton for the base machine? I would need to know what the laws are there on allowable weights. Here is a link to Aspen trailers as an example. I have no idea what the availability of lowboy trailers is there, but I would guess that the trailer may be more expensive than the 984. http://www.aspentrailer.com/products_heavyHaul.html
Not to many of those older ones left here but when they were current I worked on dozens of them. They were normally transported here with the bucket and stick off. That stick has had the extra external plates welded on. It would go around 6500 kg and the bucket probably similar. Check the bearings in the end of the stick and in the bucket. They are the first to come loose on those machines.
In my number crunching I was actually working in metric tonnes (t) as opposed to US tons (T). I understand it was only taking the numbers from the manufacturer's data sheet but something didn't add up between what that sheet said for the weight of the individual parts of the machine and the OP, about 20 tonnes of difference to be exact. As much as you can get on it without the tyres going flat, then add another 10% ......... There's also the problem of getting hold of a trailer similar to that one in the African jungle .....
I don't think there are any 'mega stringent' laws. As long as the driver is wearing his seatbelt and you've paid the road tax on your tractor unit, you're pretty much ok. So I guess it's just the case of the trailer being enough to sensibly carry the load. You do see the occasional big rig here and there. The port in Togo serves several of the landlocked central African countries where theres a fair bit of mining/quarrying going on. Although, I'm not sure if these guys would be bothered to do a short to medium distance haul. They'd probably only be interested in big jobs going to Burkina Faso, Mali or Niger (1,500km+) whilst charging a kings ransom for it.
We used to haul all our gear from Durban port to the Zambian Copperbelt - 2000+km. It wasn't cheap, even back then.....
A 3 axle low loader works out at around £5 per mile. Once we paid around £14 a mile for a 4 axle rig - a bit steep considering the lower cost of fuel, substantially lower wages and the overall quality/condition of what the haulage guys operate.
Oxbow - yeah you were pretty much right. A used trailer to carry that 984 along with a used 8x4 tractor will amount to 4.5x the purchase price of the excavator itself. I got recommended this bad boy earlier today:
Yasus H Christ...... where are you going to find someone with the required engineering degree to run those trailer controls...? IMHO that trailer would last about 5 minutes tops in Africa.
Point well taken Nige. Probably a simple Chinese built trailer would be more practical for Africa. Not to mention being cheaper new than a second hand western low loader that as you rightly say 'needs a degree to operate'. Seeing this reminds me of our water well drilling rig that has given us nothing but suicidal levels of grief since we imported it in 2012. We can't find a half decent Detroit Diesel fitter or anyone that can do justice on an International truck for love nor money. We've just put it up for sale to try and raise the cash to buy that 984.
It is interesting how regional regulations dictate design. Here everything is calculated on what is known as a bridge law, which is the maximum allowable weight on a given number of axles over a given distance. For example, 3 axles in 8' allows 34,000 pounds, and 3 axles in 10' allows 43,500 pounds. http://www.imstransport.com/docs/Federal_Bridge_Gross_Weight_Formula.pdf We can permit more than the weights listed in these charts, but when one is way over the permits are route specific. What brought this to mind is that our lowboy outfits tend to be much longer than those seen in Europe, but may have the same number of axles.
There is no such thing as bridge laws in Europe....... Here the weight is specified as axle loading only and there is no minimum distance over which those axles must be spread, unlike the US. Here like the US if you have a REALLY heavy load the n you have to have a permit in order to move it and said permit will specify the route you must take.
Not to confuse "bridge" laws with the loading of a bridge or overpass, but I suspect our laws try to take into account how much weight these structures can handle within a certain span. I wonder if European structures are designed to handle greater total load within a specified distance, or if our regulations are just more conservative regarding how close to designed capacity the engineers are willing to go.
A factory in China came up with this. 6 axles but arranged in 3 lines of dual axles. They reckon it's good for a payload of up to 150 tons.
At what speed and what size of tyres are on it..? I remember coming across some "100 ton" trailers once that were only rated for 100 tons at 5mph, at 30mph they were rated 40 tons...... Caveat emptor.
They're getting back to me with the final spec on Monday/Tuesday. Some of these ad's on the Chinese trade portals are misleading. They'll offer 120/150 ton trailers and when you look into it properly, the rated payload may only be 50-60 tons. I think they advertise the GVW and not the payload. From a previous offer they gave, it seems they use mainly 10.00-R20's which would be no good for Africa's glorious roads.
Yair . . . Not really relevant to this discussion but, if you are interested in trailers the video on this link is worth a look, I wouldn't have minded towing one of those . . . rated up to 120 tons. http://www.draketrailers.com/swingwing And 'o course if you need a tilt deck Cheers.
Looking at the diagram above there is no way that 6 x 4 tractor will handle the imposed kingpin load from a 150 ton payload or even 150 ton GTW for that matter. With that size of tyre on the back , even 6 axles-worth of them, that ain't a 150 ton trailer sorry ........ maybe 50 if you're generous.
Scrub Puller - Thanks for sharing. Amazing pieces of engineering. I think the price tag on something like that would give me a heart attack though.
I see your point Nige. I looked up the load capacity of a 10.00-R20 just now and it doesn't match up with what they're telling me by a long shot. That first trailer with the complex hydraulics had a GTW of 135 tons (117.5 tons CAT 3) and for that they recommended an 8x4 if we were hauling that 984 or a D11N etc.
Yair . . . . rodtg, Nige I have been out of the game for so long it hurts but I don't understand this statement . . . . We thought nothing of putting a fifty plus ton D9g and ten or fifteen tons of chain on a two rows of eight 8.25-16's on the trailer with the standard10.00-20's (not radials of course) on the drive. Speeds were low due as much to rough gravel roads as much as lack of power . . . maximum speed was 28 or 32mph depending on the truck. Tyres were never much of a consideration in the rough stuff . . . more so on the black top, a condition I would have maybe applied in Africa today? Cheers.
Scrub Puller - I'm just going by what I see on the roads. Floats with bigger tyres are pretty much the most popular choice as even the main roads outside the capital are not the greatest. If you're venturing into the bush, the unpaved roads get more and more brutal the deeper you go in. Adding lunatic drivers to the scenario usually doesn't help matters. I do apologize, but neither me or my old man have ever dealt with transporting anything bigger than a D8N or a Hitachi EX455 - much smaller than what we're looking to transport.
Those are neat trailers Scrub. The height of the deck would cause problems here with some loads though. If we get over 14' finding a route with high enough clearance can become a problem.
Scrub Problem in Africa is that your Down Under rough gravel roads are smooth compared to african blacktop . Sometimes the potholes cover more square yards than the blacktop. This pic is from the more advanced parts of Africa.
I'll second that. In the good old days the main road north to the Copperbelt from Lusaka the Zambian capital was affectionately referred to as the "300km pothole", especially in the rainy season. Driving that road was like doing a slalom ski course, you were literally swerving from one side to the other including using the dirt off both edges to try to find a pothole-less route. Happy daze.
Yair . . . . seatwarmer. Point taken but we have some good'uns. The main highway past my gate is a case in point . . . after rain it delights in pulling the front ends out of various vehicles including the almighty Landcruiser. Cheers.
And how would you move the Liebherr on a road like yours ? I'm talking old school ways. The modern stuff tend to break down at the sight of potholes with pieces of road around them. It took me more than 4 weeks awhile ago to move 5 tons of sensitive electronic equipment +- 1700 km to a mine in Mozambique. Even the setup in your photo is doable because 1) spares for that will more readily available than fancy new gear. 2) It will fit in with the Africa timekeeping 3) Going faster than the speed you can stop in 15 meters is suicide (the other road users that do not believe in pshysics)
Not to mention pedestrians with zero road sense that just appear out of nowhere. I've lost count of how many close calls we've had even in a 4x4....
Yeah Rod After 38 years of driving on African roads every day has a new surprise What is the distance you plan to move the Liebherr ?
The distance could vary from a few miles to a thousand miles. It's intended for hire/contract work and not to be transported to one destination and left there for an indefinite period of time. So it could very well end up being moved about a good few times in it working career with us. There's plenty of monster kit (D11's, 100 ton + haul trucks and 100 ton + excavators) that mostly looks in straight enough condition at knock down prices and I'm just doing the exercise to see if we could make it work. Locally theres no one geared up for serious earthmoving. The mentality is currently to invade a project with a large amount of smaller equipment and the operation becomes grossly inefficient. We're also looking to try and serve places like Burkina Faso, Mali and Niger which has more solid demand for this kind of equipment. Hence having our own rig to haul the stuff about would pay for itself fairly swiftly. The biggest rig locally can take a 100 ton payload and the last time we used it to transport a 50 ton excavator, it worked out at $23 a mile. So if we were doing work in these destinations, the investment for our own rig would be easily justified.
look at south africa to supply to grunt work at the current exchange rates u will get what u need at next to nothing
If we were paying in Rand, it would make sense at the moment as the West African Franc (XOF) is quite strong against the Rand.
Ever see the youtube video where they had a set of cradles made to run the tracks up in on the excavator. Then he stuck the bucket in a haul truck, picked the front up and away they went. Pretty neat idea. I'm guessing a haul truck would be a little big on a highway thou.
Yair . . . . rodtg Dunno mate its horses for courses and if you have a big digger you need to have big trucks . . . how much is the dirt worth? I have always found a tightly run operation running smaller gear is the go in remote areas. If the big digger has a hiccup the whole operation stops, for cash flow and progress payments I would be more comfortable with multiple smaller units . . . you obviously don't have to pay mine rates for operators. Not being negative, just standing back and looking at the big picture. I remember a job where we were pulling the tops off a couple of hills with scrapers and got well and truly beaten in cost per yard by a couple of cat loaders, a grader and fleet of hired in road trucks . . . big is not necessarily better. Cheers.
Scrub Puller - Yeah more smaller equipment does offer greater redundancy, I totally agree there. It would take several excavators in the 40-45 ton bracket to keep up with the 984 and I'm just looking at the economics of one larger machine vs probably 4 smaller machines in terms of cost per cubic metre. There are advantages and disadvantages of both approaches. As for the dirt, this project is still in the very early stages. It's a lake to be constructed on the outskirts of the capital that needs some 750,000 cubic metres excavated and hauled away. We're trying to propose a fixed price per cubic metre to do the excavating using two of these 984's. One working and one as a standby machine.
Yair . . . Gotcha mate . . . suitable trucks are obviously available? Cheers.
Not many ADT's available locally and the ones that are available are too small (Volvo A25C's). Tipper trucks are more popular locally. Saying that a chap we know has a fleet of 40 ADT's in neighbouring Ghana (Volvo A40E's and Bell B50D's) that are available for hire and within easy transport distance.
You're talking about the Sleipner system ........ http://www.sleipner.fi/
Handy for transporting plant around a job site. Hardly ideal for on-highway transport. I just cringe imagining the level of extortion that would take place when the African police flag you down at a checkpoint...
I found a company in Turkey that offers trailers with more realistic (and believable) specs than the Chinese. They can offer trailers that can take a payload of up to 125 tons based on a 7 axle configuration. Roughly 18 tons per axle using 12-R22.5 tyres.